From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 641BE8F53 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2023 16:12:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0B63EC433EF; Thu, 6 Apr 2023 16:12:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1680797574; bh=f0G5GtMX0Vww/OBGVTVkEPr8cy3Z6qlQlEOKio6hNl4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=cSVvcg3zFbmG5sAGzQ/ByO5aATJV9Jy3CgKyWjtejL0e0hiHVolxQUjvfrKNbI788 58wCx9Mpgl0C1GI/r7cJznw69HenWorG+KLMRmlKkb/2s857HcIPYsucgf9k9cvskb w453mC+m6QV/47w4xpKDw/bunrg11fc7K2Xrg/wFFpSnqKOyalGDl97nR5Lx3lPA0X aAk2iN0TXv8s1aJ0AtfJ5NEEptKr+/m3yru6Fee4i6Chl5evcANy2mJnwoa7RP3Vbj O58JOUv8IVELYUF4WthY5mXEUSbkvlVY6R97TTRNQa1Y4/ttYqGKSXEtKA92v4PL4D ngbfD1b//l7Bg== Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 18:12:49 +0200 From: Simon Horman To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Paolo Abeni , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Tom Rix , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] ksz884x: remove unused #defines Message-ID: References: <20230405-ksz884x-unused-code-v1-0-a3349811d5ef@kernel.org> <20230405-ksz884x-unused-code-v1-2-a3349811d5ef@kernel.org> <454a61709e442f717fbde4b0ebb8b4c3fdfb515e.camel@redhat.com> <20230406090017.0fc0ae34@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230406090017.0fc0ae34@kernel.org> On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 09:00:17AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Thu, 06 Apr 2023 15:37:36 +0200 Paolo Abeni wrote: > > On Wed, 2023-04-05 at 10:39 +0200, Simon Horman wrote: > > > Remove unused #defines from ksz884x driver. > > > > > > These #defines may have some value in documenting the hardware. > > > But that information may be accessed via scm history. > > > > I personally have a slight preference for keeping these definitions in > > the sources (for doc purposes), but it's not a big deal. > > > > Any 3rd opinion more then welcome! > > I had the same reaction, FWIW. > > Cleaning up unused "code" macros, pure software stuff makes perfect > sense. But I feel a bit ambivalent about removing definitions of HW > registers and bits. I guess that it two down-votes for removing the #defines. Would it be acceptable if I reworked the series to only remove the dead code - which would leave only subset of patch 3/3 ?